Contact your Parish Council

APPLICATION:       MA/09/1098         Date: 23 June 2009        Received: 20 August 2009

 

APPLICANT:	Mr D  Savage
LOCATION:	LAND SOUTH OF, MARDEN ROAD, STAPLEHURST, KENT, TN12 9LG
PROPOSAL:	Erection of detached barn and 3 (no) polytunnels as shown on drawing number 1751/1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 received on 24/6/09.
AGENDA DATE:   CASE OFFICER:	3rd September 2009   Geoff Brown

 

The recommendation for this application is being reported to Committee for decision because:

 

●  It is contrary to views expressed by Staplehurst Parish Council

 

POLICIES

 

Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000: ENV28, ENV43
The South East Plan 2009: CC1, C4

Village Design Statement: N/A

Government Policy: PPS1, PPS7

 

HISTORY

 

The relevant planning history is as follows:

 

MA/09/0623 – Erection of an agricultural building (resubmission of MA/08/1877) – Refused.

 

MA/08/1877 – Erection of an agricultural building – Refused.

 

MA/07/2246 – Retrospective planning permission for alterations to existing access, moving existing single gate back 1.5m from the highway, laying down of type 1 roadstone surfacing and installation of double gate at entrance – Approved.

 

MA/07/0865 – An application for the prior approval of the local planning authority for the erection of a steel framed box profile clad building for the storage of farm machinery, fertilizers and a packaging and storage area – Prior Approval Refused.

 

MA/94/0711 – Erection of a new agricultural building – Withdrawn.

 

MA/94/1505 – Erection of a single storey building in connection with the keeping of goats – Refused and appeal dismissed.

 

 

CONSULTATIONS

 

STAPLEHURST PARISH COUNCIL wishes to see the application refused “because a business case had not been made to support the proposal and no landscaping scheme had been included.”

 

MARDEN PARISH COUNCIL (the neighbouring Parish) wishes to see the application approved. “Councillors recommended Approval but wished the following conditions to be considered:

(1)                Own grown produce to be packed on site

(2)                Agricultural use only

Councillors also wished noted that there was a gas pipe laid across this land in the past however actual location is not known.”

 

RURAL PLANNING LTD points out that the last application (MA/09/0623) was for a four bay building 24.4m by 10m with an eaves height of 4.2m. The latest proposal is for a scaled-down building 15.24m by 9.1m, and 3.6m to eaves. It would be effectively less than half the capacity of the last building that was proposed. This current proposal is put forward on the basis of a need to store hay from the land (some 1200 small bales), the storage of a tractor and farm implements and space for packaging and packing in relation to the proposed introduction of fruit and vegetable cropping (including under the proposed polytunnels). Rural Planning consider the building has been reduced in size to the extent that it would be reasonably necessary for the purposes of agriculture on this smallholding. The proposed polytunnels, as units of production in themselves, can also be regarded as reasonably necessary for the identified agricultural purpose.

 

THE KENT COUNTY COUNCIL HIGHWAYS OFFICER has no objection.

 

REPRESENTATIONS

 

ONE LOCAL RESIDENT supports the application, noting that the position of the development has been moved.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Description of the Site

 

The application site comprises agricultural land laid to grass located in open countryside on the south side of Marden Road. The application site extends to approx. 4.5 ha and benefits from the relatively new gated access to Marden Road permitted under MA/07/2246. An access track runs north/south just beyond the eastern boundary of the site and serves a small group of buildings that, I understand, are within the applicant’s ownership, but managed by another smallholder. There are no buildings currently on the application site.

 

The Proposal

 

This application proposes the erection of a new agricultural building approx. 15.2m by 9.1m, 3.6m to eaves and 5.1m to ridge of dark green steel sheeting under a light grey fibrous cement roof. Also proposed are three polytunnels of clear plastic over metal hoops to an overall height of 6m. The barn and polytunnels are proposed to be sited in the north east corner of the site served by a short roadway to the aforementioned access point.

 

The applicant’s agent has written to elaborate on the nature of the agricultural activities that would take place on this site:

a)   Hay would be taken from the land and sold to local riding stables.

a)   Cherries would be harvested and packed on site.

b)   One polytunnel would be used to produce soft fruit, including raspberries.

c)   The other polytunnels would be used to grow a variety of vegetables including asparagus, beans and broccoli.

d)   Free range chickens would produce eggs.

A list of local customers is provided.

The barn would provide storage for the hay bales, the equipment necessary to work the land, the packaging materials and an area for packing.

 

Planning Considerations

 

As an exception to the general theme of development restraint in the countryside, Development Plan Policy and Central Government Guidance allow for the construction of new agricultural buildings. Local Plan Policy ENV43 governs such development. With ENV43 in mind, I consider the main issues here to be whether there is a need for the structures and the impact of the scheme on the appearance of the countryside.

 

Looking at the history, application MA/09/0623 proposed a much larger barn on the west side of the land. That application was refused because of doubts over the need for a building of that size and because the siting of the building and associated access were considered to be too prominent.

 

In relation to this application, on the issue of agricultural need, Rural Planning consider the scaled down building and the associated polytunnels to be reasonably necessary (see above) given the extent of the landholding and the stated intentions to produce hay and to introduce fruit and vegetable cropping. I have considered this expert advice and I consider that the scheme is reasonably necessary for the purposes of agriculture.

 

The siting of the development is now less isolated than previously, being located close to the approved point of access and benefiting from the hedging and tree cover on the northern and eastern boundaries of the site. Almost all modern agricultural buildings have some negative impact on the countryside but in this case I consider the impact would be minimised and visual harm would not be so significant as to refuse planning permission. No trees of any significance would be lost as a result of the development. A landscaping scheme could be put in place to help further screen the development and this could be secured by conditions.

 

The site is well separated from residential neighbours and I do not consider there would be any impact on residential amenity. There is no objection from the Highways Officer and there is no reason to refuse this application on highways issues.

 

Conditions should be imposed to secure landscaping. This is an agricultural building for the needs of this holding and I do not consider that the conditions requested by Marden Parish Council are necessary: if a material change of use of the site occurs then such a use would be open to enforcement action. I consider the scheme acceptable and recommend that permission be granted.

 

This application had been scheduled to be discussed at the last Planning Committee meeting. It was withdrawn from that agenda due to a late question as to whether a third party had an ownership interest in the land. That person has now withdrawn her objection and the agent has confirmed that the applicant owns all of the land with no other ownership interest. The application can therefore now be determined.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

         

 

1.   The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission;

Reason: In accordance with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2.   No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of landscaping, using indigenous species which shall include indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development and a programme for the approved scheme's implementation and long term management. The scheme shall be designed using the principles established in the Council's adopted Landscape Character Assessment and Landscape Guidelines;

Reason: No such details have been submitted This in accordance with Policy ENV43 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000.

3.   All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the building(s) or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner; and any trees or plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation;

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory setting and external appearance to the development This in accordance with Policy ENV43 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000.

The proposed development, subject to the conditions stated,  is considered to comply with the policies of the Development Plan (Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000 and South East Plan 2009) and there are no overriding material considerations to indicate a refusal of planning consent.